Reaching board decisions online.

How group decision support tools can streamline meeting processes.

A 15-member board needs to draft a new vision statement for its association. Instead of going the more traditional route of using flipcharts to brainstorm and reach consensus on ideas and visioning words, the association opts to use group decision support tools, a type of software also known as groupware.

The dedicated groupware room rented for the brainstorming session provides networked personal computers within a U-shaped seating arrangement for participants. The groupware facilitator begins the session with a brief warm-up exercise to demonstrate how easy the tools are to use. Participants type in key words or phrases that they would like considered for the vision statement. Their input is anonymous and simultaneous.

Next, the facilitator offers an initial vision statement to the group, based on the previous input. Board members begin editing the statement on their own terminals. When each member has finished his or her first draft, he or she follows the verbal or online instructions (for example, hitting one of the "F" keys) to send the anonymous comments to a central projected screen, which lists everyone's contributions.

Board members discuss the ideas and verbally decide on which phrases they want to focus. The process is repeated as the statement is refined. When there is more than one suggested version, participants rank order their preferred vision statements. The anonymous rank order vote shows how much buy-in there is for the new vision statement. Eighty percent of the participants strongly agree with the new vision statement, with the remainder agreeing. One pleased board member comments: "We could never have accomplished the tasks in this amount of time and with such creativity and total participation without the tools and guidance."

Group decision support tools, like the ones used in this example, enable more thorough communication and, thus, better decision making. They can increase the value of your board's most important assets: time and people.

Groupware tools have proven to reduce meeting and decision-making time by 30 percent to 60 percent. Such common challenges to effective meetings as dominant personalities who take over proceedings, incomplete record keeping, and people fearful of voicing an opinion in a group setting are nonexistent with groupware decision making, where input is equal and anonymous.

Groupware tools support common and sophisticated meeting processes such as brainstorming, ranking, evaluating alternatives, charting action steps, and building consensus (see sidebar, "Types of Tools"). Verbal discussion continues to be a critical component of successful meetings and building long-term relationships. Groupware tools do not replace group discussion and group dynamics. What groupware tools do is provide powerful support at certain junctures in the meeting when creativity, speed, confidentiality, and consensus are needed.

Where groupware works best

Decision support tools can provide value wherever a group process is involved. Here are some examples:

* Planning: A planning task force collects traditional data for external and internal forces impacting its organization. Using several groupware tools, task force members prioritize the issues, collaboratively write critical objectives, brainstorm alternative strategies, and develop an implementation plan. (See sidebar, "A Groupware Meeting Case Study.")

* Problem solving: The board realizes it doesn't have time to complete all agenda discussion items, so it ranks the priority of remaining items.

* Team building: A new board of directors is appointed to represent an organization created by the merger of two associations. New faces and styles and cultures are present. The new board anonymously lists expectations and concerns, then brainstorms responses and solutions, and finally prioritizes immediate action steps.

* Judging an awards program: The committee brainstorms and selects judging criteria, agrees on weights to place on various criteria, and votes on the candidates using the weighted criteria.

The facilitator's role

The use of an experienced facilitator is recommended for most traditional meetings, which generally explore complex or controversial issues. Likewise, for electronic meetings, a facilitator is a partner in the achievement of goals. The facilitator's experience in using groupware technology helps to maximize the benefits of using the most appropriate tool at the right time and in having flexibility to switch tools onsite depending upon the direction of the meeting discussion.

Part of the facilitator's role is to conduct premeeting planning. This is the "make or break" preview time for your meeting. The facilitator needs to meet with the chief staff executive and chief executive officer to define meeting goals, identify premeeting tasks and materials, bring nuances among participants and politics and history to light, and discuss the expected flow of the meeting agenda.

From this premeeting planning session with the client, the facilitator uses the association's agenda to map the tools to accomplish tasks and goals. In most cases, the facilitator works onsite with a "technographer," who operates the software tools during the meeting so that the facilitator can focus on group dynamics and achievement of goals.

As mentioned earlier, traditional goal-directed dialogue is of utmost importance in group performance. The electronic meeting does not eliminate this dialogue. Instead, the facilitator observes the group to intersperse the use of the groupware tools to reach consensus or resolution when dialogue is completed.

Some groups opt to conduct electronic meetings without a facilitator. What is usually sacrificed is the discipline of the premeeting planning sessions, the crystallization of goals, the objectivity and focus during the meeting, the traditional neutral and goal-directed control of the meeting's dialogue, and the professional experience in meeting processes. However, there are times when a facilitator's role can be minimized and made necessary only part time, such as with a longer-term series of group sessions that involve only writing and editing.

While there is a role for the facilitator and technographer to play, you and your chief executive officer as the client also have responsibilities to fulfill. You must commit to the premeeting planning time and clearly understand the purpose of the meeting and its desired goal. You must be sure the appropriate participants are present and provide sufficient advance notice and information. Finally, you must be willing to accept ownership of the meeting's outcomes.

Even when the meeting outcomes are different from your own opinions, the objective process and honest feedback need to be valued and acted upon. Like any meeting, when participants contribute their time and efforts, they want to know what action, further study, or future meetings will take place.

Meeting considerations

Conducting a groupware meeting involves several steps. As mentioned above, after you and the facilitator have clearly defined the meeting's purpose and goal, identify a date and location for the event.

The facilitator can coordinate the logistics for the groupware session. If your meeting is in a city where a dedicated groupware room exists, it is usually more cost-effective to rent the room with all the hardware, software, and support included. Many universities, consulting firms, and large corporations have groupware rooms available for rental.

If a dedicated room does not exist, a portable setup is brought to the location of your choice. A portable system is also common for a retreat setting. Most groupware environments can accommodate up to 15 or 20 personal computers. Alternatives include renting additional PCs or sharing terminals.

The groupware system includes total hardware and software setup with the file server, the PCs, the software tools, a projection device, and printer. Sometimes groups desire additional audiovisual support, such as an overhead projector, whiteboard, or multiple screens.

Most associations conduct groupware meetings for a half day for specific executive committee or task force agendas. For comprehensive meeting processes, like long-range or fiscal-year planning, the meeting may run a full day or several days.

All participants do not have to be physically in the same location for an electronic meeting. However, for a first-time gathering using groupware tools, a "same time, same place" environment works best. Since the group dynamics include important dialogue and, now, the introduction of new tools, maximum benefit is achieved when all participants are together.

The alternatives to the "same time, same place" environment include "same time, different place," which is similar to a telephone conference call. Participants in remote locations are linked into the meeting through coordination of the system setup and hear the verbal discussions through a telephone conference call.

A "different time, same place" environment involves a dedicated groupware room where participants (usually in-office staff) add to the meeting brainstorming, voting, or editing after additional research is completed and input is needed.

Finally, a "different time, different place" meeting is what happens at organizations that have groupware installed in-house on their computers. The person who wants to call a meeting sends an e-mail message that discusses the meeting's agenda, purpose, process, and tools that apply.

The comfort factor

Concerns are common with any new application, and groupware is no exception. Elected leaders who are not computer savvy might legitimately wonder if they can master groupware applications. The facilitator can quickly put such fears to rest by determining at the outset what is the comfort level of participants. If most are novices, a nonthreatening exercise - for example, asking participants to input their favorite vacation destination or food - puts them at ease and demonstrates how easy it is to participate in the process.

Forming teams is another way to help participants who don't generally work on computers feel comfortable. Some may even decide to bring along an administrative assistant to actually input information. But this admittedly rare arrangement doesn't generally last more than 15 minutes. The hesitant participant soon realizes how easy it is to hunt and peck the keyboard to input information and actually prefers the anonymity of going it alone.

Instructions on how to perform certain functions are given slowly and repeated often throughout the process. Voting, for example, simply involves the use of a few characters. Colorful, user-friendly screens are not intimidating at all. (Note: A Windows version is now available, although some groupware system setups may not yet have the upgraded hardware necessary to support Windows.)

Another concern is the perception that the groupware process will limit and inhibit verbal dialogue. Participants soon see that dialogue is not restrained, just more focused.

What about the importance of trust-building with open communication? While the anonymous feature for input allows unlimited freedom in groupware sessions, the facilitator can step in to ensure respectful electronic dialogue that stays focused on the agenda.

In a group in which members know each other well, private jokes might start creeping into dialogue. All the facilitator has to do is to remind participants of the meeting's time frame and the need to only input information that is related to the agenda. Where opinions are stated perhaps a bit too passionately, the facilitator can remind participants to phrase their comments as if they were talking to someone.

Groupware tools help generate new ideas. You get down to the core issues and reach goals with action-oriented outcomes. Using electronic groupware for your next meeting can gain the most value from participants' limited time. And, they may even have fun in the process.

RELATED ARTICLE: Types of Group Decision Support Tools

Here is a brief description of the different types of group decision support tools. The benefits of simultaneous and anonymous input, and complete documentation, apply to each tool.

* Electronic brainstorming. Participants develop and refine comments in an open-ended manner.

* Categorizing. Participants build a list, refine, consolidate, and add comments.

* Voting. Options include ranking order, multiple choice, agree/disagree, yes/no, true/false, a 10-point scale, and point allocation.

* Issue comments. Participants open colorful, predefined, on-screen "file folders," each of which has a question or topic. After opening each folder, they input comments, which can be read by any participant.

* Group dictionary. Participants build and define a list of terms that can be accessed at any time during a session. Example: A group develops an action plan and everyone must use the same definition for certain words, such as "feasible" and "profitable."

* Evaluation of alternatives. The group rates a list of alternatives against a list of group-defined criteria, with considerable analysis. "What if?" scenarios can be explored by adjusting the weights for the importance of criteria.

* Developing policy statements. The group develops and edits a statement through a repetitive process of review and revision.

* Group outlining. Participants build an outline structure to visually organize planning activities such as developing the parts of an action plan; comments can be attached.

* Surveys. Groups can incorporate nine types of questions and store the template (the master design) for multiple uses. Up to 100 questions per survey, with analysis and subgroup filtering, are available.

* Group writing. Groups create, edit, and annotate within the same document. Collaborative writing is accomplished for action plans, testimony, books, conclusions, and other project-related activities.

* Identifying stakeholders. A comprehensive tool for extensive analysis and exploration of how groups (stakeholders) will be affected by a particular action under consideration. Participants try to anticipate various groups' responses by surfacing and rating assumptions and graphing the results.

RELATED ARTICLE: The Cost Factor

The costs and outcomes for an electronic meeting can be compared to a traditional meeting to fully grasp the significance of the value provided by the groupware setting. Another perspective is to view the electronic meeting as the culmination of an entire consulting engagement, with professional expertise, facilitation, and logistical support.

The electronic meeting cost includes

* hardware, personal computers, printer, software tools;

* professional facilitation and system administration (two on-site consultants);

* premeeting consultation for goal definition and agenda building;

* meeting coordination, logistics;

* meeting room, audiovisual equipment, supplies; and

* complete documentation on hard copy and diskette.

The price for an electronic meeting varies depending upon the use of a dedicated room (usually less costly) or a portable setup; the length of the premeeting planning time and the length of the on-site meeting; and the rates for your facilitator and technographer. Supply and demand definitely impact prices. For example, the Washington, D.C., area has the most installations of dedicated rooms, resulting in relatively competitive pricing.

A half-day session in a dedicated room with all the components shown here may range from $2,500 to $4,500. A full-day session may range from $5,000 to $8,000. Again, wide variations occur because of the planning time required and the location of the meeting. Some associations seek sponsorships to underwrite an important meeting process, such as the long-range plan. Others use fund-raising to underwrite a specific advocacy purpose for using group decision support tools.

What about net savings and quality meeting outcomes? Groups find the following results more than compensate for associated costs:

* less staff time in meetings;

* more efficient use of volunteers' time, with greater impact;

* reduced time to collect feedback, more timely feedback;

* increased productivity and quantity of results;

* higher quality of discussion, more creativity and innovation;

* more consensus and buy-in to meeting outcomes; and

* complete record documentation for future use.

RELATED ARTICLE: A Groupware Meeting Case Study

The following example highlights what can be accomplished during a typical electronic groupware meeting.

Who: Seven executive committee members from one organization, including the chief staff officer.

What: A half-day session to develop priority goals for the next fiscal year.

Preparation: Prior to the electronic meeting day, the senior staff team meets to review and discuss long-range plan reports and the current situation analysis. An executive summary is prepared. This report and other current critical issue reports are distributed in advance. The facilitator meets with the chief staff executive for premeeting planning.

On-site outcomes:

* Task 1. Brainstorm anonymously and simultaneously to identify important issues to consider for fiscal year priority goals. Participants use a creativity exercise suggested by the facilitator to encourage thinking outside the box. Brainstorm potential objectives that also may become priority goals. Participants generate 88 alternative ideas.

* Task 2. Group decides to verbally identify four criteria from which to rank the 88 alternative statements.

* Task 3. Individually, rate all 88 alternatives using each of the four criteria. (An equal weight is given to each of the four criteria. The group then votes to weight the criteria to more accurately weight the ranked outcome for the 88 alternatives. The system's tools immediately combine the participants' ratings into a group list of prioritized alternatives, based on the four weighted criteria.

* Task 4. Through verbal discussion, the group cleans up the top-ranked alternative statements, and reaches consensus on the priority goals for the next fiscal year.

* Task 5. Anonymously and simultaneously, the participants develop action tasks for committees and officers related to implementing the priority goals. The chief staff officer guides discussion related to staff responsibilities.

These action tasks are later turned into major objectives, tactical plans, or actual to-do activities. This step is of critical importance in identifying interdepartmental coordination activities among staff, and supporting roles for leadership.

These five tasks generate increased quantity of output and increased quality with creativity. The participants experience buy-in and ownership of the outcomes. A half-day session is sufficient for this meeting's purpose.

Documentation: Twenty-eight pages are printed out immediately at the end of the session, in addition to being on a word-processing diskette. The final outcomes are accurately captured with the entire thought-process on file.

Nancy R. Daly is president of N R Daly & Associates, Alexandria, Virginia.